Is there
knowledge we should not seek? Or is all
knowledge inherently a good thing, and can
only persons be harmful?

by Charlie
Ma

Knowledge is an experience, or the understanding
of a concept achieved through studying, whether
formal such as in a designated school or
informal. The concept must be generally
acceptable as truthful. "Cars do not need
fuel" or "hemlock improves the human
immune system" are not knowledge since most
people knowledgeable in respect to cars or
hemlock will agree the statements are false.
Statements intended to be deceptive are not
knowledge since the data are purposely false.
Studying geography in school, reading the
ingredients on food products, or listening to the
local weather station on the radio is knowledge.

All knowledge can be used to help mankind, as
well as to harm it. Even knowledge intended for
good can be used to harm. Even though the study
biology was intended to be beneficial to mankind,
it is not always the case. An understanding of
bacteria and viruses are applied in numerous
ways. It is sometimes used to help the sick
through the creation vaccines and medicine to
cure the illness. It is also used to harm through
the creation biological weapons designed to
infect victims with deadly diseases. Similarly,
knowledge intended for harm can be used to used
for benefit of mankind as well. Understanding of
nuclear fission originally led to production of
weapons of mass destruction. Destruction was its
sole purpose initially. Its concepts were later
applied to power plants which supply civilians
with electricity. A mathematical proof could
further develop math as a discipline, as will as
speed calculations. The calculations can make
corporations more efficient and lower the cost
for consumers. The calculations can also enhance
the accuracy of smart bombs, making destruction
more efficient. Even military research have civil
applications. Knowledge of historical events can
enlighten people by expanding their minds. Roman
history for example, influences many aspects of
daily life, such as art. Roman history can also
be used in war propaganda. At the peak of Roman
power, the empire stretched from Britain to North
Africa to the Persian Gulf. During World War II,
Hitler proclaimed Germanys destiny to rule
over Eurasia as the Romans did centuries ago. He
declared it was Germanys rightful destiny
to conquer, a justification for war.

Whether or not knowledge will be used for good or
harmful purposes are not dependent upon the
categories the knowledge falls in, such as the
system of knowledge, the knowledge type, or its
nature. The uses are dependent upon the people in
control of the knowledge. Since all knowledge has
the potential to help mankind, or to hurt it,
only people can decide which uses dominate. All
knowledge regardless of category has equal
potential to benefit mankind, or harm it. Whether
or not mankind is benefits or suffers is
dependent upon the people with the knowledge, and
people with power over them. Explosives were
originally used for entertainment by the Chinese
as fireworks. European nations tend to be more
aggressive militarily, such as in colonizing
large parts of the globe with force. The
hostility is reflected in its application of the
same knowledge, in firearms. More civil minded
uses of explosives include rock mining or
clearing mountains to build roads. Knowledge
normally associated with harmful applications
reflects the nature of the people, not the
knowledge.

Since all knowledge can have the potential to be
both beneficial or harmful, there is no category
of knowledge which should be avoided because of
its association with harm. There is no knowledge
which we should not seek, since knowledge is
neutral. Some people disagree however. They are
avidly against the availability of all knowledge,
to everyone. One example is the various
information available to the public on the
Internet. There are virtually more recipes to
make pipe bombs than there are to make apple pie.
The accessibility of dangerous information
worries civilians and governments. They fear
someone who has not yet developed a respect for
others will discover certain knowledge, and use
it maliciously. When one person or even a billion
reads the texts and discovers how to build a pipe
bomb, what changes? Is someone instantly injured
by this act? Nobody suffers from the accumulation
of knowledge whether it is he who gains the
knowledge or someone else.

Suppose someone is curios enough to build the
bomb. This act is simply acquisition of further
knowledge. No one has been harmed yet. Suppose he
then uses the bomb to maliciously attack someone.
The victim is harmed both physically and
emotionally, not by knowledge, but by the
malicious intentions of the person who built the
bomb. Knowledge did not harm the victim, the
person who used the bomb did. Knowledge has no
will of its own, it is the people in control of
the knowledge that dictates whether it is used
for beneficial or harmful purposes.

Suppose the bomb is accidentally set off, and the
person is hurt. There were no malicious intent
yet someone was harmed in the process. The
accident was not caused by the knowledge itself,
but the lack of knowledge. An expert bomb builder
would not have made the mistakes which detonated
the bomb. Knowledge can safeguard accidental
detonations. For example, people will usually
need to learn to drive, before being permitted to
do so. In Canada, everyone first prove their
knowledge of driving during a written exam before
being allowed to physically learn to drive. This
is not to protect people from knowledge of
driving. It is to ensure they are not a threat to
anyone else on the road. The knowledge is not
dangerous, the lack of knowledge makes the people
dangerous. Only the drivers can harm through
their vehicle, not the knowledge.

Suppose someone compiles a list of weapons of
mass destruction. The compilation includes a
method of assembly which allows the average
person to easily build the weapon with minimum
effort, requiring very basic materials which are
easily attained. If this compilation is
distributed to everyone, chaos would probably
follow. There are many sociopaths and psychopaths
who would cause mass destruction. If the
compilation is hidden, and nobody gains the
knowledge, there would not be chaos. Although
there is a direct relation between knowledge and
harm, the link is connected by people. Any damage
would be caused by the harmful intentions of the
person who compiled the list, and the harmful
intentions of the person who utilized the
compilation for mischief. Another person could
easily use the data for beneficial purposes, such
as crime prevention. The result of knowledge is
dependent upon the person. Possessing knowledge
itself does not harm anyone, nor benefit anyone.
Knowledge from a harmful person can be passed to
a good person without resulting in harm. The
second person still has the choice of whether to
use the knowledge for good or harmful purposes.

Even though the risk of knowledge causing harm
exists, it does not overcome the potential to
benefit mankind. If nuclear research was
abandoned because of the risk of a meltdown, then
nuclear propulsion would be impossible. Knowledge
is not a pandoras box, it is directed by
the people who use it. People control both new
and old knowledge. Any new knowledge is no
different than pre-existing knowledge. Each new
concept or experience uncovered leads to a
decision: good or harmful. Seeking new knowledge
opens possibility for further harm, or further
benefits. Since knowledge is neutral, good and
harmful features of new knowledge should be
similar to the proportional to the ratio of
benefits to harmful features. If the ratio stays
the same, then the amount of harm in respect to
benefits (and vice versa) stays constant. The
only difference is the amount of options
available to do good, or harm. It is still the
people who decides how to use knowledge.

Only people can be harmful, knowledge itself
cannot help anyone nor harm anyone. If someone is
harmed, that is the result of a person. It is his
will and harmful intent to harm the victim, not
the will of knowledge. Since knowledge is neither
good nor harmful, and whether the results of the
knowledge will be beneficial or harmful is
independent of any categories knowledge may lie
within, there is no reason to avoid certain
categories of knowledge. Every type of knowledge
equally has the potential to enhance daily life,
and that potential should be allowed to be
exploited even at the cost of releasing harmful
potentials. All systems of knowledge should be
researched and taught because it does not harm,
only people harm. Knowledge has will of its own.